I have toured a micropod shelter and if done in the way I observed, it is effective. The facility was clean, each individual has a "case worker", and the average stay was just under 90 days. Not all found permanent housing after as there are numerous barriers for these individuals, but giving them a secure location to store their belongings and working to overcome them is essential. One important factor is that these places are closed off to everyone but the "residents". They are enclosed by a fence and have security at the entrance. The only people that can be there are the residents. Sure, detox and all that is helpful, there are tons of services that are available, but if you can't leave your tent without all your shit getting jacked and destroyed, you won't.
Yeah, we should let them live, sleep, shit, and do drugs openly on our city streets, making them unsafe and ruining the city for everyone until we have a hugely expensive mass solution.
Yeah. Nobody has suggested a roof without help. That's not a consideration, as far as I'm aware. The roof and steady address makes the help easier to organize and provide, thereby is a force multiplier. You can help more people with a smaller workforce.
Bingo. This would be a fantastic step on the way to permanent housing. There must be no restrictions on the residents regarding curfews or access to their pods and the pods must be secure.
This is not what i said. This does not aid towards a productive convo, fyi. what is the difference between building shelters and expanding health care facilities and drug treatment facilities to handle larger capacities? Yes costs, but ive been told time and time again we can afford to fix this. So if we can, why not expand the facilities that will provide a great encompassing help to those im need vs a shelter without any additional/ conjunctional aid? And what is the difference between the homeless shitting on the streets downtown, vs the current shelter on the east side by the freeway? We keep saying most on the streets are in need of mental help aNd addiction treatment. If this is the case, why isn't this top priority? Assess who on the streets need this type of help and get them there and then the balance who just need a pick me up can go directly to shelters?
Some good points, but in patient treatment would mean they arent going back to their tent to find things stolen every day. We would need to provide a storage for the individuals goods for thier duration of treatment. Id be for that if it helps motivate then to get the proper help they need.
If they want treatment sure, but you aren't going to be successful forcing them in. Assessments are done all the time. The main problem is that they are assessed on xyz St. Then tomorrow are sleeping on the corner of abc and def St. How are you going to provide people help if they don't have a location to be found. Drugs are a problem for sure, but forcing people into expensive in patient treatment against their wishes will not be effective. The whole teach a man to fish vs giving him a fish saying makes a bit of sense here.
Why cant the assessment and transition happen at the same time? And i agree on the fish thing, but that is a statement that backs my thoughts. Why give them a shelter to make the same mistakes? Fix their issues and they can then build their own shelter… so to speak. I view giving shelters with little other help in place, the same as giving a fish. I view getting them help to be productive, more like teaching them to fish to be self sufficient. My thought is have a carpool van downtown. A couple people evaluating each individual who says they would like to be off the streets. Those who state as much and are evalled, get in the van and go to the proper place. If they have belongings needing protection, then we figure that out as well.
Funny thing, I just went to Los Algodones last week. Amazed me how there was basically no security going from US into Mexico.
Going back and forth on analogies never ends well, there's always a million interpretations that can be made. That's all great and good, I honestly don't know the downtown situation well enough as I have avoided it for a couple years now. I don't know if that could work. I can say that in the surrounding areas, shelter first non profit orgs that work with individuals to build relationships and solutions have been more effective than not.
Fair enough. Was just hoping for a bit more of a political discussion vs a finger-pointing back and forth( not saying thats what just happened) just saying the leaders are having these very discussions, or should be, and i thought we could have our own. The only thing that concerns me, or I question is assuming models that are successful elsewhere will automatically be successful here. I have not been to every homeless camp in every city, but having lived as an adult in the midwest, East Coast and West Coast, Portland seems to have a consideeably larger percentage of homeless that are homeless because they are fighting the system. They want to be where they are at overall. Free from accountability and responsibility. I have concerns these types will damper the positive effect programs could have on most of the homeless. So, to me, segregating these types from those in need that also want help, should be top priority. i personally have no want to fund a shelter for someone who actively wants to buck the system. How do we weed those who want help out from those who don't? Those who don't will still take advantage of handouts but with no respect to the gift or gifter.
I spent a summer in San Ysidro and found the same thing as well as in Tecate when I was younger. Tecate was a sleepy border town in the 70s
Because it is easier and cheaper to go the other way, and people are less likely to be abused. Get the people who want homes into homes and in care (or at least on the waiting list). Virtually everyone else has a problem that they will need help with and will need to be detained. They will either move into the provided safe, secure, climate controlled homes, or be detained, or leave the area.
The type of person you are referring to will either move into a home and follow the law, leave the area, or be arrested. And we'll have our public spaces back again
Is Bend in the surrounding area? Homeless in the City Where He Was Once Mayor https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/28/us/bend-oregon-mayor-homeless.html barfo
Homelessness is a real and present issue in every major city. I wish it weren't so, but it's prevalent. https://www.nashvillescene.com/news...cle_5af41074-e2cd-11ed-9cc8-47e785979828.html
Sixteen million homes currently sit vacant across the U.S. 582,462 Americans Homeless A homeless person currently costs approximately $30,000-$50,000 per year in supportive services. That's just over $23 billion. We're already spending this money Average rent for a 2br in the US is $1320 per month. Or, $15,840 per year. That's for a 2 bedroom. It's almost like we could just put them in existing homes and save a BUTTLOAD of money... With plenty left over to reimburse landlords for damages. Oh, that's right... we have to make them suffer. Even if it costs us more and ruins our public spaces. The most important thing is being able to judge them.
